The Good Samaritan

The Parable of the Good Samaritan is one of the most well-known Parables that Jesus taught. But its familiarity is also the reason, at least in part, that the impact that it had when it was first spoken, is almost completely lost on modern hearers. There are hospitals and charitable organizations all over the country that incorporate the name “Good Samaritan.” Routine references to total strangers doing good things, and being referred to as “Good Samaritans” is a very common, but completely misunderstood phrase. Tonight, I would like to take a close look at this Parable, and try to restore some of the impact that it had at its initial telling. Luke 10:25: "And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself. And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live. But he, willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbour? And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead. And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side. But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him, And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee. Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves? And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise." First, I have to ask the question: What does the Bible mean when it refers to a Samaritan? Who were the Samaritans? When Solomon died, a rebellion and Civil War erupted that divided the Nation of Israel into two separate nations, with two separate histories over the failure of Solomon's son Rehoboam, to hear the cries of the people and lighten the tax burden that Solomon had imposed on the people to finance his lavish standard of living. The tribes of Judah and Benjamin remained loyal to Solomon's son, and lived in the territory in the South of what had been the Kingdom of Israel. They also maintained Jerusalem as their capital city, and seat of government. They called their nation Judah. A rival kingdom, calling itself Israel, seceded from the 12-tribe Kingdom of Israel, and claimed its territory in what was the northern portion of the country. The Old Testament records for us, a separate list of kings and dynasties, and a separate set of national events. Notice how in this one Verse, from 1 Kings 16:29, two separate but concurrent kings and two individual nations are named: “And in the thirty and eighth year of Asa king of Judah began Ahab the son of Omri to reign over Israel: and Ahab the son of Omri reigned over Israel in Samaria twenty and two years.” Samaria was the capital city of the northern nation of Israel. And, in the Old Testament, there were also separate lists of prophets whom God sent to each individual ruling king to tell them of God's great displeasure with their rebellion and sin, and the impending punishments that would follow if the individual nation did not repent. Ok, so now we have a thumbnail sketch of what was going on in the history of Israel and Judah, as well as Jerusalem and Samaria. But this is only the foundation of the story. There is a very important plot development that we also have to mention in order to fully appreciate Jesus' Parable of the Good Samaritan. Because of repeated national sins on the part of the nation of Israel, and, as He promised He would do if the sins continued, God used the Assyrians to sweep into Israel and deport its residents and place them throughout the Assyrian Empire. There were, according to The Interpreters' Dictionary of the Bible, two accounts of what took place: First, according to the Jews, in order to keep wild beasts from taking over the depopulated land, over a number of years, the Assyrians then imported foreigners into land once occupied by the nation of Israel. They had no lineage to Abraham, they were not descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and they had not been enslaved in Egypt. Simply stated: they had no past association with the children of Israel in any way. But they reasoned that in order to remain in the land, they should find out who the God of this land was, and then try to serve Him correctly, so that a similar deportation did not befall them. A priest was brought in to teach them about Judaism, but his teachings were drowned out in their practices with pagan elements. This helps us to understand the fierce animosity of the Jews toward the Samaritans. But the Samaritans themselves have a different account: They say that there were some foreigners and colonists brought in, but also that the entire population of the Nation of Israel was not deported. They also claim that many of those who were deported were repatriated and allowed to return to Israel some 55 years later. This seems to have some Scriptural support. I will get to that in a minute. Then, many years later, the Southern Nation of Judah was also conquered and deported. The main difference between the two histories is that, after 70 years, Judah was allowed to return and rebuild their capital, their Temple, the walls of their cities, and their nation. The foreigners that had been transplanted into the Northern Nation of Israel set up shop, set up house keeping, developed a patchwork of their religion with some elements of Judaism and were living in what had come to be known as Samaria. Insofar as the Samaritan claim that they were also descendants of the children of Israel, notice two interesting statements the woman of Samaria made to Jesus after He asked her to get Him a drink at Jacob's well: We read her first claim regarding the Samaritans beginning in John 4:10: "Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water. The woman saith unto him, Sir, thou hast nothing to draw with, and the well is deep: from whence then hast thou that living water? Art thou greater than [u]our father Jacob[/u], which gave us the well, and drank thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle? Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again:” (emphasis mine). And then she said in John 4:20: “[u]Our fathers[/u] worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship” (emphasis mine). This was a perfect opportunity for Jesus to hit the challenge her statements, as He immediately did when she said she had "no husband," and simply tell her in no uncertain terms that the Samaritans were descended from Gentiles who were imported by the Assyrians, and who had no Abrahamic lineage. I find it very interesting that Jesus did not do that. I admit that His silence is not proof that the Samaritans [i]were[/i] of the line of Abraham, but if they were not, Jesus did not correct her. His omission, here, tends to corroborate her claim as to the Samaritans' descent from the Hebrew Patriarchs. So, now we have been fast-forwarded to Jesus day, and we get plunked down into all of this history, most of which the average Church-goer knows nothing about. This is what happens when one leaves everything he or she knows about Scripture, to the whim, the priorities, and time allowance of the pastor, if this history is included in a sermon or Bible Study. When the Jews returned to the land of Judah, they had nothing to do with the Samaritans living in the northern territories. They hated them and disowned them. The were called dogs and swines. The name "Samaritan" was used as a virtual curse word. Notice this Passage. The Jews who opposed Jesus were in a very heated back-and-forth with Jesus, denouncing Him, and vice versa. I order to get the full flavor of this exchange I will quote an extended portion of it beginning in John 8:36. Jesus is speaking: "If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed. I know that ye are Abraham's seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you. I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father. They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham. But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham. Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God. Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me. Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word. Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not. Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me? He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God. Then answered the Jews, and said unto him, Say we not well that [u]thou art a Samaritan[/u], and hast a devil? Jesus answered, I have not a devil; but I honour my Father, and ye do dishonour me" (emphasis mine). And they dishonored Him with the worst insults they could think of: the double-whammy of calling Jesus being both physically: a Samaritan or heretic and "impostor" of Abrahamic lineage, thereby having no rightful claim as heir to the Promises; and mentally: being demon possessed, thereby having no genuine communication with God, or claim to being sent by God. The Jameisson, Faucett and Brown Commentary says the following: “Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil? -- What intense and virulent scorn! (See Hebrews 12:3: “For consider him that endured such contradiction of sinners against himself, lest ye be wearied and faint in your minds”). The "say we not well" refers to another hot debate between Jesus and the Jews as we read in John 7:19-20: “Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me? The people answered and said, Thou hast a devil: who goeth about to kill thee?." JFB continues, “'A Samaritan' means more than 'no Israelite at all'; it means one who pretended, but had no manner of claim to the title -- retorting perhaps, this denial of their true descent from Abraham.” [i]All of this[/i] has to be taken into account when we read the Parable of The Good Samaritan because when Jesus spoke this initially, everyone who heard it, had all of this painful history and stinging reality come rushing in when Jesus made a Samaritan of all people, a Samaritan! the hero of the story!! Let's look at the Parable again, basically from the point when the Samaritan appears. Remember, a priest and a Levite have already seen the wounded and unconscious traveler, and crossed to the other side of the street. Perhaps they felt he got what he had coming to him... perhaps they did not want a similar fate to befall them... all we know us that they went nowhere near him. He was left for dead, and for all they cared, if he died, that was none of their business. But this opens up a new avenue for us to pursue before we actually re-tell the portion regarding the Samaritan. And that is this: When God asked Cain where his brother Abel was. We read the account in Genesis 4:9: “And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not:” First we see that the first part of Cain's response is a lie. He certainly knew where Abel was. The previous Verse tells us: “And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him” (Genesis 4:8). And, like the ill-fated traveler in the Parable we're examining, Abel was also left for dead. He wasn't moving after Cain rose up against him, and so Cain know right where he had left him when he lied to God saying he did not know Abel's whereabouts. But then Cain, in an effort to further absolve himself of any responsibility, asks a question that the Parable of The Good Samaritan also addresses: It is a question that has all of the potential to confront each of us on a daily basis. And it is one that we have to come to grips with and resolve in our own minds as to what God expects of those who claim to belong to Him, and who claim to be in a personal and saving relationship with Him. The question that Cain asks is: “Am I my brother's keeper?” The Apostle James had something to say about this beginning in James 2:15: “If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit? Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.” But Cain's question of “Am I my brother's keeper?” also mirrors, to me, the lawyer's question to Jesus: “Who is my neighbor?” This question is very interesting because it is not simply asking for a specific identification of whom he should regard as a neighbor, but the very basis of it is this: To whom do I have to apply that portion of the Law which Commands me to “love my neighbor as myself”? If you merge Cains's and the lawyer's questions into one, you get: “[i]Whose keeper am I[/i]?” And the Parable of the Good Samaritan answers that question. But let's carefully notice what Jesus does next. In the telling of just one Parable, Jesus delivers a double-whammy answer of His own. First, He has a Samaritan be the hero of His Parable. And then He completely folds, spindles and mutilates the concept of neighbor from the lawyer's definition of being the recipient of someone's care and keeping, to the one who is providing the care and keeping! Notice, again, Jesus' summary question when He was done speaking the Parable: Speaking of the priest, the Levite and the Samaritan, all of whom encountered the robbed, beaten and near-dead traveler, Jesus asked the lawyer in Verse 36: “Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves?” In the Parable, the neighbor is identified as the doer, the giver, the compassionate provider, [i]the keeper![/i] Far and above merely understanding, agreeing with and believing that part of the Law, the neighbor in this Parable was [i]living[/i] what God commands us. His faith was not dead, but alive with mercy, compassion and positive, godly activity. Jesus deliberately painted the Samaritan into the role in this Parable of living the precepts He laid out in the Sermon on the Mount: Notice in Matthew 5:43: "Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.” No, the Samaritan in this Parable was not perfect. But his positive, merciful, selfless and godly actions were for the benefit of a man who, being a Jew, very likely would not have done the same toward him had their circumstances been reversed. And there is another difference between Jews and Samaritans that is very easy to miss in all of this: Let's go back to the woman at the Jacob's well, a Samaritan woman. “The Book of John” by Johnson and Richards points out that the Jews of Jesus' day routinely went miles out of their way in order to avoid the much-hated Samaritans. But Jesus went through the lands and villages. He came to a city called Sychar, and stopped at Jacob's well being wearied and thirsty from His journey. The woman who came to the well at noon to fill her water pot was stunned that Jesus would break with Jewish custom first by being in Samaria at all, and second, and at least as startling, to initiate a conversation with her. She voice that surprise in Verse 9 when she said, “How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.” But after His brief conversation with her, we learn some very amazing things about the Samaritans... things that I have never heard mentioned in any sermon... things that I have never read in any book. Most people think of the Good Samaritan when they think of Samaritans. And they may vaguely recall that Samaritans were hated by the Jews. But the account of Jesus' encounter with the Samaritans in John 4 reveals some other amazing things. Notice this exchange between Jesus and the woman beginning in John 4:16: “Jesus saith unto her, Go, call thy husband, and come hither. The woman answered and said, I have no husband. Jesus said unto her, Thou hast well said, I have no husband: For thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly. The woman saith unto him, Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet.” First, she perceived that Jesus was a Prophet. Jesus then tells her in Verse 24: “God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he.” In preparing this study, I was amazed to come to understand that, like the Jews, the Samaritans were [i]also[/i] looking for the coming of the Messiah! And Jesus acknowledged to her, quite openly and plainly, that [i]He was the One[/i] they were waiting for. The woman leaves her water pot, runs into town and very excitedly starts telling people that she had met and spoke to the Messiah. But something else that is very interesting happened next. Jesus had been alone with the woman at the well. The disciples came back from buying food, and were stunned when they saw Him talking with the woman, but did not challenge Him about it. Then, after she ran off to tell the townspeople she had found the Christ, Jesus made a very interesting statement to His disciples. I was previously aware of this declaration, but it never occurred before, [i]where[/i] He was when He had made it. And [i]where[/i] He said changes everything! Notice His words in John 4:35: “Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for they are white already to harvest.” To Jesus, the despised and much-maligned Samaritans were part of the “spiritual harvest” the He wanted His disciples to reap, and gather for the Kingdom of God. Truly, Jesus' Gospel Message and ministry and sacrifice was for [u]the world[/u]. And how did the Samaritan townspeople of Sychar react to the woman's claims in Verse 29: “Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?” Let's pick up the story in Verse 39: “And many of the Samaritans of that city believed on him for the saying of the woman, which testified, He told me all that ever I did. So when the Samaritans were come unto him, they besought him that he would tarry with them: and he abode there two days. And many more believed because of his own word; And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world. Now after two days he departed thence, and went into Galilee.” The Samaritans [i]gladly[/i] received Jesus' teachings. They knew He was a Jew, but they did not regard Him with the disdain and contempt the Jews held for them. Notice also, the difference how in contrast to the Samaritans, the residents of His own home town of Nazareth received Jesus and His teachings. It was His first Sermon where we read in Luke 4:28: “And all they in the synagogue, when they heard these things, were filled with wrath, And rose up, and thrust him out of the city, and led him unto the brow of the hill whereon their city was built, that they might cast him down headlong.” Far from being filled with wrath, the Samaritans were not satisfied to hear His words for just one sermon, or even one afternoon. Unlike many of His own people, Verse 40 tells us, the Samaritans “besought him that he would tarry with them:” and finishes by telling us that Jesus “abode there two days.” He and His disciples were welcomed into the homes of Samaritan families. And I am sure that He and His disciples were also well fed. There were no attempts to stone Him as we read in John 8:59: “Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by,” and John 10:31: “Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him....” There were no accusations of His being demon possessed as we read in John 10:20: “And many of them said, He hath a devil, and is mad; why hear ye him?” There were none of the accusations we find in Luke 7:34: “The Son of man is come eating and drinking; and ye say, Behold a gluttonous man, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners!” The Samaritans did not accuse Jesus of being a deceiver (Matthew 27:63), or a blasphemer (Mark 2:7). They did not try to trap Him in His words to turn Him over to the Romans for advocating tax evasion (Matthew 22:16-22). They did not arrest Him under trumped up charges, arrange for false witnesses in a rigged and illegal trial, and still call for and demand that He be crucified after being beaten, scourged and [i]found innocent[/i] of [u]any and all charges![/u] Rather, there is only one response that is attributed to the Samaritans: We read in Verse 42: “... [i]we[/i] have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.” They accepted Him. And they honored Him. And this is made all the more apparent when you read Jesus' own words immediately after leaving the land of the hated Samaritans: Verse 44 says, “For Jesus himself testified, that a prophet hath [i]no honour in his own country[/i]” (emphasis mine). But He was well-treated and respected among the Samaritans. Jesus' experience with them is found early in John's Gospel (Chapter 4), and may well have also been early in His Ministry. But after reading of that experience, is it any wonder that He would have made a Samaritan the hero of this Parable, while also contrasting the selfish, unsympathetic and ungodly choices made by the leading citizens of His own people? But let's return to the lawyer's inability to answer Jesus' question as to which of the three was neighbor to the ill-fated traveler. The Jamieson, Faussett and Brown Commentary says this: “36. Which ... was neighbour? -- a most dexterous way of putting the question: (1) Turning the question from, "Whom am I to love as my neighbour?" to "Who is the man that shows that love?" (2) Compelling the lawyer to give a reply very different from what he would like -- not only condemning his own nation, but those of them who should be the most exemplary. (3) Making him commend one of a deeply hated race.” And he does it, but it is almost extorted. For he does not answer, "The Samaritan" -- that would have sounded … heretical...” No... the neighbor in this Parable is a Samaritan. In the culture in which the lawyer was raised, the Samaritan was a heretic, a usurper, an impostor, and the lowest of the low. It was unthinkable, and, to those living two thousand years ago in Judea, unimaginably scandalous for Jesus to have chosen a Samaritan as the hero of this Parable. And so, in response to Jesus' question of who the neighbor was in this Parable, as was pointed out above, the lawyer could not bring himself to speak the word, “Samaritan” in any kind of positive light. And so he identified the one who “was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves” simply as “He that shewed mercy on him.” He knew who it was... but he just could not say “the Samaritan was neighbor... the Samaritan showed mercy, and kindness, and fulfilled the Law of God.” It just was not in him. And we miss that aspect, and that deep impact of the Parable if we are not aware of the local history and the culture in which it was spoken. But I also cannot help but think of the unexpectedly warm and welcoming response toward a Jewish Messiah, from a people who were the recipients of such contemptible defamation. But this also serves to call upon us to examine our own lives, and our own thoughts. Is there a group of people, of any description, that you have labeled as “Samaritans?” If there is, you need to take that sign down, and tear it up, throw it away, and never hang it up, again, over the heads of any group. Regardless of what they did, or what you think they did, or what someone you trust with your life told you they did... that sign has to come down. It has no place in the life of a Christian. And those signs are everywhere. There seems to be a need, or a drive of some kind within human nature, to first identify, and then look down on and hate people who don't look like we do or think like we do. And I am sure that Satan is at the bottom of it all, stirring the pot and fanning the flames. But we are aware of a group who is different in some way. They may be members of a different race or nationality, students or graduates of a different school, they may attend a different Church, a different denomination, worship a different god, speak a different language, or the same language with a different accent. This group may support a different political candidate, or espouse a different political ideology. If there is a difference, there is the very real potential for looking down on, criticizing and even hating the people in that group. Let me give you the best example I can think of, in describing the senseless “need” to identify, separate and look down on people who are “different:” Many years ago, I worked with a guy who had been in the Navy. And he told me something that really put the icing on the cake of identifying and denigrating “different” people. He told me that the sailors on the ship who worked in the Radio Room, were looked down on by the sailors who worked in the RADAR Room! Now just think of this: Here was a group of enlisted men, all serving to defend their same country, in the same Branch of the Military, and on the exact same ship. They spoke the same language, may have been the same race and religion, from the same part of the country, and been of the same national origin. Virtually every potential point of animosity and confrontation was settled. There were none of the issues over which wars have been fought to generate the hanging of the “Samaritan” sign on anyone. But... these sailors did not perform the same tasks on the ship. They served their country in different occupations, and the Samaritan sign was brought out and applied! The RADAR Room sailors looked down on the Radio Room sailors. But then, if they came into port, and went on shore leave, and encountered a group of Marines in a bar, a new “Samaritan” issue would have arisen because they would have been confronted with a new difference that they would have to deal with, and do something about! And as sure as I am sitting here typing, a barroom brawl would have erupted following a few provocative and incendiary comments back and forth. The “Samaritan” sign is always in a back pocket ready and waiting to be hanged around the necks of some group. And this is not just happening in America, but all over the world! There have been endless wars, "ethnic cleansings," pogroms, invasions and bloodshed since the birth of Cain and Abel. Cain was a tiller of the ground, and Abel was a keeper of sheep. One's sacrifice was rejected, the other's was accepted. One applied the Samaritan sign, rose up against the other and slew him. And none of it, from Cain to the most recent death based on race, religion, ethnicity or any other difference can be justified, especially among Christians. And I am sure it does not come as a News Flash to any of you hearing my voice or reading these words that Christians are not immune from both the potential of wrong thoughts, motives and actions against other groups of men and women, even other Christian groups, which, for one reason or another, are not exactly like us. But this too, is a powerful and major, but often overlooked aspect of the Parable of the Good Samaritan. As John asked in 1 John 4:20: “If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?” The Samaritan in the Parable was [i]neighbor and keeper[/i] to a stranger in need. After Jesus spoke the Parable, the account of Jesus' discussion with the lawyer is summed up in Verse 37: “Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.” I will end with Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Parable of the Good Samaritan. Keep in mind that the telling of the Parable was in response to a question we read in Luke 10:25: “And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” Matthew Henry writes: “If we speak of eternal life, and the way to it, in a careless manner, we take the name of God in vain. No one will ever love God and his neighbour with any measure of pure, spiritual love, who is not made a partaker of converting grace. But the proud heart of man strives hard against these convictions. Christ gave an instance of a poor Jew in distress, relieved by a good Samaritan. This poor man fell among thieves, who left him about to die of his wounds. He was slighted by those who should have been his friends, and was cared for by a stranger, a Samaritan, of the nation which the Jews most despised and detested, and would have no dealings with. It is lamentable to observe how selfishness governs all ranks; how many excuses men will make to avoid trouble or expense in relieving others. But the true Christian has the law of love written in his heart. The Spirit of Christ dwells in him; Christ's image is renewed in his soul. The parable is a beautiful explanation of the law of loving our neighbour as ourselves, without regard to nation, party, or any other distinction. It also sets forth the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward sinful, miserable men. We were like this poor, distressed traveller. Satan, our enemy, has robbed us, and wounded us: such is the mischief sin has done us. The blessed Jesus had compassion on us. The believer considers that Jesus loved him, and gave his life for him, when an enemy and a rebel; and having shown him mercy, he bids him go and do likewise. It is the duty of us all , in our places, and according to our ability, to … help, and relieve all that are in distress and necessity.” This concludes this Evening Discussion, “The Parable of the Good Samaritan.” By Romans, originally delivered on July 19th, 2012